[Bug 1316] New: Review Request: ffms2 - An FFmpeg based source library for easy frame accurate access
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1316
Summary: Review Request: ffms2 - An FFmpeg based source library
for easy frame accurate access
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: rpm(a)greysector.net
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SPEC: http://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/ffms2.spec
SRPM: http://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/ffms2-2.13-1.fc12.src.rpm
Description:
FFmpegSource (usually known as FFMS or FFMS2) is a cross-platform
wrapper library around FFmpeg, plus some additional components to deal
with file formats FFmpeg's libavformat has (or used to have) problems
with. It gives you an easy, convenient way to say "open and decompress
this media file for me, I don't care how you do it" and get frame- and
sample-accurate access (usually), without having to bother with the
sometimes less than straightforward and less than perfectly documented
FFmpeg API.
The library is written in C++, but the public API is C-friendly and it
should be possible to simply include and link directly with a pure C
application. The source is available under the MIT license, but the
binaries are GPL licensed because they need to be linked against a GPL'd
FFmpeg.
Why not in Fedora?
It's a wrapper around FFmpeg with strict dependency.
$ rpmlint ffms2*
ffms2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libavformat -> informative,
malformation, informatics
ffms2.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://ffmpegsource.googlecode.com/files/ffms2-2.13_src.7z HTTP Error 404: Not
Found
ffms2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libavformat ->
informative, malformation, informatics
ffms2.x86_64: W: no-documentation
ffms2-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) ffms -> fums, ff ms,
ff-ms
ffms2-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ffms -> fums,
ff ms, ff-ms
ffms2-tools.x86_64: W: no-documentation
ffms2-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ffmsindex
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 2 months
[Bug 1035] New: Review request: amap - Network tool for application protocol detection
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1035
Summary: Review request: amap - Network tool for application
protocol detection
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: rebus(a)seznam.cz
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org, rebus(a)seznam.cz
Blocks: 2,30
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SPEC: http://rebus.webz.cz/d/amap.spec
SRPM: http://rebus.webz.cz/d/amap-5.2-1.fc12.src.rpm
Description:
THC Amap is a next-generation tool for assistingnetwork penetration testing.
It performs fast and reliable application protocol detection, independent
on the TCP/UDP port they are being bound to.
Package is based on the amap package from PLD linux using the patches used for
the PLD src.rpm
Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora:
AMAP license is applying extra restrictions to GPLv2 making it non-free for
Fedora. This is also source of warning of rpmlint as this is not approved
license.
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2010-January/msg00003.html
rpmlint output:
amap.src: W: invalid-license GPLv2 with AMAP disclaimers
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
This is my first (public) package for rpmfusion and fedora so I kindly ask for
reviewer and sponsoring.
Thank you
Michal Ambroz
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 5 months
[Bug 118] New: Review Request: cinelerra-cv - Advanced audio and video capturing, compositing, and editing
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=118
Summary: Review Request: cinelerra-cv - Advanced audio and video
capturing, compositing, and editing
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: kwizart(a)gmail.com
CC: matthias(a)rpmforge.net, rpmfusion-package-
review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SRPMS:
http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/cinelerra-cv/cinelerra-cv-2.1-22.g...
SPECS:
http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/cinelerra-cv/cinelerra-cv.spec
Summary: Advanced audio and video capturing, compositing, and editing
I would like to help merging cinelerra-cv within RPM Fusion.
Few notes:
cinelerra need to be renamed to cinelerra-cv because the cinelerra name is from
Herroine-Virtual, Hence there is a need to avoid conflicting namespace.(it
remains to have the locale renamed along with some internals libraries
dropped).
--with libmpeg3_system is meant to be used with libmpeg3 from current rawhide.
F-8/F-9 will use the current internal snapshot. This is the most recent patch.
Might need the same patch for mpeg2enc (will needs more testing).
Some of the patches still bundled was already submitted upstream. But
unfortunately, the "community upstream" failed to understand why they are
needed.
I will give a re-try today.
@Matthias
I would like to co-maintain cinelerra-cv with you. But the current way bugzilla
works for now, assume the primary owner to be the default assigned e-mail to
any bugreport.
Would you agree if I'm this primary owner ?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 6 months
[Bug 585] New: Review Request: z-push - ActiveSync over-the-air implementation for mobile syncing
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=585
Summary: Review Request: z-push - ActiveSync over-the-air
implementation for mobile syncing
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: rpmfusion-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Spec URL: [Will come very soon]
SRPM URL: [Will come very soon]
Description:
Z-push is an implementation of the ActiveSync protocol which is used
'over-the-air' for multi platform ActiveSync devices, including Windows
Mobile, iPhone, Sony Ericsson and Nokia mobile devices. With Z-push any
groupware can be connected and synced with these devices.
For use cases of Z-push with the Zarafa Outlook Sharing and Open Source
Collaboration, please use the prepared package zarafa-z-push.
I'll add the spec file and source rpm this evening or so, then I also will
set RF_NEW blocker. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498194 is a
blocker dependency as well. Before that, this package unluckily doesn't make
that much sense. Of course z-push is nice with IMAP and so as well, but the
main purpose is with Zarafa.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 6 months
[Bug 789] New: Review request: moc - Music on Console
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=789
Summary: Review request: moc - Music on Console
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
URL: http://raylu.no-ip.org/moc/
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: rayllu(a)yahoo.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2,30
Estimated Hours: 0.0
http://raylu.no-ip.org/moc/moc-2.4.4-1.fc11.src.rpm
http://raylu.no-ip.org/moc/moc.spec
Description: MOC (music on console) is a console audio player for LINUX/UNIX.
This package is a modified version of the Fedora packages linked to from here:
http://moc.daper.net/download
MOC includes MP3 playback capabilities, which is why it's not eligible for the
Fedora repositories. Like the 2.4.0 i386 packages, I could split the decoder
plugins up and submit the MOC core to Fedora and the decoder plugins to RPM
Fusion (though I'm not clear on exactly what functionality is and isn't
allowed). Also to note is this review request in Fedora:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490210
The patch that I include allows the FFmpeg decoder plugin to build when
ffmpeg-devel is installed, but it seems a bit hackish.
$ rpmlint SRPMS/moc-2.4.4-1.fc11.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/moc-2.4.4-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
However, I should note that the debug package gets:
$ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/moc-debuginfo-2.4.4-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
moc-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/src/debug/moc-2.4.4/libltdl/.libs
moc-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/src/debug/moc-2.4.4/libltdl/.libs
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
I am seeking a sponsor since this is my first package.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 7 months
[Bug 899] New: REVIEW: imagination - a DVD Slide Show Creator
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=899
Summary: REVIEW: imagination - a DVD Slide Show Creator
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: alsadi(a)ojuba.org
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 0.0
hi, this is my first trial to pack something for rpmfusion
why not in fedora, because it depends on ffmpeg so it should be in
rpmfusion-free
the package is from http://imagination.sourceforge.net/
It's packing was straight forward.
here is the .src.rpm
http://www.ojuba.org/downloads/updates/3/SRPMS/imagination-2.1-1.oj3.src.rpm
I build it on ojuba 3 (fedora 11)
[alsadi@pc1 imagination]$ rpmlint
/opt/rpmbuild/RPMS/i586/imagination-2.1-1.oj3.i586.rpm
imagination.i586: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.1-1 ['2.1-1.oj3',
'2.1-1.oj3']
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/en_GB/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/ja/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/pt_BR/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/ru/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/sl_SI/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
imagination.i586: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/sv/LC_MESSAGES/imagination.mo
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 8 months
[Bug 1257] New: Review request - gpac - MPEG-4 multimedia framework
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1257
Summary: Review request - gpac - MPEG-4 multimedia framework
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: lucas.jacobs(a)mines.sdsmt.edu
CC: kwizart(a)gmail.com, rpmfusion-package-
review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 1.5
Created an attachment (id=427)
--> (http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/attachment.cgi?id=427)
Diff from old SRPM to new SRPM, without the new CVS tarball
SRPM: http://vidya.dyndns.org/stuff/gpac-0.4.6-0.4cvs20100527.fc13.src.rpm
SPEC: http://vidya.dyndns.org/stuff/gpac.spec
Description:
GPAC is a multimedia framework based on the MPEG-4 Systems standard developed
from scratch in ANSI C. The original development goal is to provide a clean,
small and flexible alternative to the MPEG-4 Systems reference software.
GPAC features the integration of recent multimedia standards (SVG/SMIL, VRML,
X3D, SWF, 3GPP(2) tools and more) into a single framework. GPAC also features
MPEG-4 Systems encoders/multiplexers, publishing tools for content distribution
for MP4 and 3GPP(2) files and many tools for scene descriptions
(MPEG4 <-> VRML <-> X3D converters, SWF -> MPEG-4, etc).
Short version:
This package is already in RPM Fusion, (patent concerns?) and used to include
MP4Box, a popular muxing tool. Currently the binary RPM doesn't include MP4Box,
and the source RPM doesn't build. This submission will fix that.
rpmlint mentions some harmless comments in the spec file that I didn't remove
because they were present in the previous version, and missing manpages for
some binaries - manpages for mp4box and mp4client are provided, however.
There's also the source tarball pulled straight from gpac's CVS repository
which needs to be hosted somewhere.
I've been using MP4Box built from this SRPM for a while, and it seems to work
fine. Osmo4 crashes on start, but that's nothing new. I haven't tried the rest
yet. I just finished getting the SRPM to cross-compile for a 32-bit target on a
64-bit platform, so that should be okay.
This is my first RPM Fusion package.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 8 months
[Bug 459] New: Review request: nvidia-cuda-toolkit - NVIDIA CUDA Toolkit libraries
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=459
Summary: Review request: nvidia-cuda-toolkit - NVIDIA CUDA
Toolkit libraries
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: xjakub(a)fi.muni.cz
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SPEC:
http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/nvidia-cuda-toolkit/nvidia-cuda-toolki...
SRPM:
http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/nvidia-cuda-toolkit/nvidia-cuda-toolki...
Description:
NVIDIA(R)CUDA(TM) is a general purpose parallel computing architecture
that leverages the parallel compute engine in NVIDIA graphics
processing units (GPUs) to solve many complex computational problems
in a fraction of the time required on a CPU. It includes the CUDA
Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) and the parallel compute engine in
the GPU. To program to the CUDATM architecture, developers can, today,
use C, one of the most widely used high-level programming languages,
which can then be run at great performance on a CUDATM enabled
processor. Other languages will be supported in the future, including
FORTRAN and C++.
Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora:
Not open source.
rpmlint output:
>rpmlint ../SRPMS/nvidia-cuda-toolkit-2.1-1.src.rpm
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.src:53: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib
This is ok, even moving file from the hardcoded path.
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.src: W: no-%build-section
Nothing to build. This, however, implies no stripping & no debuginfo.
Unfortunately, debuginfo creation fails because the binaries don't contatin
build id. I don't know whether there is something I could do with this.
>rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/nvidia-cuda-toolkit-*
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/bec
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/inline
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/be
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/gfec
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/nvopencc
See the previous comment.
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libcufft.so.2.1
exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/libcufftemu.so.2.1 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/libcudart.so.2.1 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5
Again, there is nothing we can do with this, AFAIK.
This is my first RPM Fusion package, I'm already a Fedora packager (both FAS
names are mjakubicek). My primary motivation to package this is that I maintain
a CUDA-enabled application, see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487981.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 8 months